Signs, signs, everywhere a sign...

[Argie's Wife]

Okay, the Primary election is over and the visual clutter is still everywhere - including around the lake. It's worse than people leaving their Christmas lights up until Valentine's Day.

Are there any ordinances for all these signs?

[Heaven]

TITLE LXIII
ELECTIONS
CHAPTER 664
POLITICAL EXPENDITURES AND CONTRIBUTIONS
Political Advertising
Section 664:17
664:17 Placement and Removal of Political Advertising. – No political advertising shall be placed on or
affixed to any public property including highway rights-of-way or private property without the owner's consent.
All political advertising shall be removed by the candidate no later than the second Friday following the
election unless the election is a primary and the advertising concerns a candidate who is a winner in the
primary. Signs shall not be placed on or affixed to utility poles or highway signs. Political advertising may be
placed within state-owned rights-of-way as long as the advertising does not obstruct the safe flow of traffic and
the advertising is placed with the consent of the owner of the land over which the right-of-way passes. No
person shall remove, deface, or knowingly destroy any political advertising which is placed on or affixed to
public property or any private property except the owner of the property, persons authorized by the owner of the
property, or a law enforcement officer removing improper advertising. Political advertising placed on or affixed
to any public property may be removed by state, city, or town maintenance or law enforcement personnel.
Political advertising removed prior to election day by state, city, or town maintenance or law enforcement
personnel shall be kept for one week at a place designated by the state, city, or town so that the candidate may
retrieve the items.
Source. 1979, 436:1. 1994, 4:28. 2006, 273:1, eff. Aug. 14, 2006.

[brk-lnt]

Those signs are SO annoying when you see a dozen or more of them in a row. I'd love to see the regulations limit them to 1 every 500' or something.

[Jeanzb1]

Such a blight to our beautiful area..... these God-awful signs are just as bad as seeing beer cans, water bottles and other trash littering our landscape.

[RI Swamp Yankee]

... ...people leaving their Christmas lights up until Valentine's Day. ...
Is that a bad thing? :cool:

[jeffatsquam]

I don't vote for anybody that I see their name on one of these roadside sings.

It only encourages them

[Lakesrider]

I don't vote for anybody that I see their name on one of these roadside sings.

It only encourages them

So you don't vote? :D

I saw on the news that one of the winners was telling everyone that lost to get their signs down in one week as it is the law. However primary winners can keep them up until the regular elections.

So If they can all put their signs up can I put up signs saying I hate political signs...?;)

[Argie's Wife]

What about the signs people put on their beaches? There's tons of those! I've been amazed by that one...

And Lakesrider - I love your idea... but it's a.n.o.t.h.e.r. sign... :D

Am I wrong to want an early snow and hope the plow trucks take care of these eyesores now?

[upthesaukee]

Those of us who belong to organizations that do roadside cleanup hate seeing stuff that has been covered up by snow for months, and then we have to pick it as mush:):(.

[Argie's Wife]

True. (And we've worked with BSA to do roadside clean up, too...)

Good point.

OK... let's raise more revenue for the state maybe? A $5 fee/day for each sign left up 7 days after the election? :)

[jmen24]

True. (And we've worked with BSA to do roadside clean up, too...)

Good point.

OK... let's raise more revenue for the state maybe? A $5 fee/day for each sign left up 7 days after the election? :)

That sounds like a great idea!

[RailroadJoe]

Good idea. But remember they are the ones who make the laws.

[RLW]

TITLE LXIII
ELECTIONS
CHAPTER 664
POLITICAL EXPENDITURES AND CONTRIBUTIONS
Political Advertising
Section 664:17
664:17 Placement and Removal of Political Advertising. – No political advertising shall be placed on or affixed to any public property including highway rights-of-way or private property without the owner's consent.
All political advertising shall be removed by the candidate no later than the second Friday following the election unless the election is a primary and the advertising concerns a candidate who is a winner in the primary. Signs shall not be placed on or affixed to utility poles or highway signs. Political advertising may be placed within state-owned rights-of-way as long as the advertising does not obstruct the safe flow of traffic and the advertising is placed with the consent of the owner of the land over which the right-of-way passes. No person shall remove, deface, or knowingly destroy any political advertising which is placed on or affixed to public property or any private property except the owner of the property, persons authorized by the owner of the property, or a law enforcement officer removing improper advertising. Political advertising placed on or affixed to any public property may be removed by state, city, or town maintenance or law enforcement personnel. Political advertising removed prior to election day by state, city, or town maintenance or law enforcement personnel shall be kept for one week at a place designated by the state, city, or town so that the candidate may retrieve the items.
Source. 1979, 436:1. 1994, 4:28. 2006, 273:1, eff. Aug. 14, 2006.

Which one is the rule, RED or Blue??? Who is responsible for enforcing the laws??:)

[Pineedles]

Boy, am I dissapointed! For the "Live Free or Die State" alot of you, including ONE who was elected through a political process, are complaining about advertising? I would imagine that most of the complainers aren't even registered to vote? It has been my experience that those who complain about all politicians aren't even registered. Truth, or not? I think so. I'm not promoting one party or the other, but statements like, I don't vote for people who put up signs, is not the statement of a thinking person. In order for candidates to get name recognition signs are needed. Come on! Look at the issues! Decide what you like and don't like about what is happening now, and vote for the guy or gal that YOU THINK is going to improve this Town, County, STATE, ..............or COUNTRY!!!! GET INVOLVED WITH YOUR FUTURE! AND if you are too old to be worried about YOUR future, think of your children's future.... Rant over.

[Argie's Wife]

Pineneedles - with all due respect - the point is that the election is over and the signs are still up.

Like the sign for a yard sale that's left up weeks after its over, or the wedding that was at a private home... the event is past. It's time the people cluttering up our beautiful roads and town squares and whatnot take care of things. I'm asking for responsibility - these candidates claim they have it when they're making their speeches - they need to prove it in the big and little things.

My experience with signs: they're expensive. The candidate with the most money wins - not necessarily the best candidate for the job. That may be fodder for another forum or thread but certainly something to consider. Name recognition and branding are key.

Your rant is not without value but this forum member is doing her civic duty on a school board and my town's budget committee and votes at every election - and has since she was 18 years old (a long time ago...)

[Argie's Wife]

Which one is the rule, RED or Blue??? Who is responsible for enforcing the laws??:)

I was confused by that, too, when I ran for office. So, I called my town's highway department and the NH DOT to clarify it.

You may not place signs on highway ramps, at traffic circles, and other state-maintained roads, intersections, etc. You may place signs on town maintained roads and other public areas - but be careful not to place signs near memorials, cemeteries, and public parks - people don't take kindly to that (and I'm one of them!)

Here's my rant:
We have a war memorial in the center of Alton on Main Street, by the town hall, Monument Square. I'm sure many of you have seen it. My pet peeve is when candidates use that for a place to park their signs. It's cheap, thoughtless, and disrespectful to our men and women who served and died - and to their families. It's an area that should be non-partisan, non-political, and no advertising of any kind should be allowed there.

[Rattlesnake Guy]

The playoff game is done but the Super Bowl is in 41 days.
I am surprised we don't see more. Wait a week or two and you will miss these days. Fewer candidates but bigger stakes and more money.

I just hope they put our credit card away soon.

[Skip]

Good points RLW, but as always the Devil is in the details.

If you read the portion of the RSA you have highlighted in red, this allows private property owners and individual communities to allow or deny political signs. Some comunities allow unfettered access to town road rights of ways and public squares, while others don't . Many communities regulate signage through the zoning process. Don't be confused by the term "highway" in this particular highlighted passage, as that is an old legal term for any public roadway.

Your second passage highlighted in blue is what allows candidates access to State owned right of ways, with the obvious caveats attached.

So the first passage refers to private properties and Towns & Cities. The second passage is the State policy.

Finally all political signage can remain in place until the second Friday after the election. In the case of a primary the winner loser must abide by this date. The winner can keep signs up from the primary through the election and must remove them by the second Friday after the final vote.

[Alton Bay]

I think it should be mandatory for those who lost their primary races to remove their signs immediately after. I also think signs should only be on private property. It would eliminate a lot of clutter.

[Skip]

I think it should be mandatory for those who lost their primary races to remove their signs immediately after. I also think signs should only be on private property. It would eliminate a lot of clutter.

I believe that cnadidates should have a reasonable time to remove signs.

That said I agree with you 100% that each and every candidate should have to secure permission from a landowner to post a sign and all signs should be on private property.

To me it is just plain lazy to toss up countless signs on public property and not take the time or effort to secure property owner permission. A sign in the front lawn of a family or homeowner tells me the candidate has taken the time to deliver their message and get permission from the perspective voter.

I am always leary of the candidate that seems to have no signs on anyone's lawn, but has thirty plucked down in the middle of the Town square!

This current election cycle is a clear example of campaign workers run amuck when it came to posting signs along the State's highways and many local communities raodways and rights of way! :(

[Pineedles]

AW,
It was a bit of a rant, sorry. I just came back from replacing a sign that was thrown into a creek on private property twice in the past two weeks. Signs are expensive for the candidates and volunteers like myself take time out of their schedules to try and make a difference by helping their candidates. I guess I just went off the deep end when I see folks complaining about signs.

[Argie's Wife]

AW,
It was a bit of a rant, sorry. I just came back from replacing a sign that was thrown into a creek on private property twice in the past two weeks. Signs are expensive for the candidates and volunteers like myself take time out of their schedules to try and make a difference by helping their candidates. I guess I just went off the deep end when I see folks complaining about signs.

I wasn't offended; I have a thicker skin than that. But thank you for your post. I've always liked reading you here on the forum and appreciate your views - even when we don't agree.

I've seen signs removed, thrown down, driven over, and defaced in the name of "politics"... not good sportsmanship if you ask me.

[RI Swamp Yankee]

Since the state needs money here is a way to generate revenue (keep in mind I have read too may FLL posts ;) )

The state (or towns) could collect all signs left up past the time allowed by law and "redeem" them, perhaps charging candidates $20 per square foot for the total footage "redeemed". Example, 100 signs collected, each 2 square feet equals 200 square feet times $20 equals $4,000 owed by the name on the sign. Maybe the "cost" would encourage them to remove them rather than paying to have them "redeemed".

:eek:

[wifi]

Since the state needs money here is a way to generate revenue (keep in mind I have read too may FLL posts ;) )

The state (or towns) could collect all signs left up past the time allowed by law and "redeem" them, perhaps charging candidates $20 per square foot for the total footage "redeemed". Example, 100 signs collected, each 2 square feet equals 200 square feet times $20 equals $4,000 owed by the name on the sign. Maybe the "cost" would encourage them to remove them rather than paying to have them "redeemed".

:eek:

Imagine what damage someone could do by putting out signs with their enemies name on them

[steadyon]

Hi all,
Here is another point of view.
I am a candidate. My friends, family have contributed their own hard earned $ so that I can purchase and display signs. I agree that too many are annoying and also that they should only be on private property isn't a bad idea either.
what bothers me is that someone is stealing my signs in the night. taking signs is not going to make a candidate loose.
it is a shame that this person has that kind of time on their hands. they could be doing something productive like picking up trash along the road or helping a neighbor.
thanks for listening

[jrc]

First of all are these little signs an effective campaign tool? I mean most just say the candidates name. Do people really go into the booth and say let's vote for him I saw his name on the corner? At least tell me what your number one issue is.

Second, they should use paper or other degradable materials for the signs. Those plastic ones fall into the brush and stay for a long time, at least paper would be dissolved into the ground by spring. The press should make this a "green" issue and shame the candidates into it, no need for a law.

[Seeker]

I vote for chalkboards.

(Did I spell that right?)

[summersux]

it is a shame that this person has that kind of time on their hands. they could be doing something productive like picking up trash along the road

Yeah, I think thats what they are doing.

[Rattlesnake Guy]

My son worked for a campaign this summer and said it was kind of funny that the state would go around each day and pick up the signs that were put in the wrong places on the state roads. They would dump the pile in the same secret place each day and the campaigns would go and fetch the signs to repeat the process the next day.

[Ropetow]

My home community removed the signs of defeated candidates placed on public property a few days to a week after the election. This is a bonanza for other local elected officials, as we can go to the home of the dead signs and pick their bones....the wire stakes signs sit on are not cheap and this is a way to save some $$$ for the next election while also practicing good recycling.

[SAMIAM]

There should be a modest fine for every day a political sign is left up after an election.Same for yard sales and other events.We backed a candidate last year for a local election and the very next day we drove around and picked them all up...........cleaned up the roads......and who knows....we might get to re-use them

[Ropetow]

There should be a modest fine for every day a political sign is left up after an election.Same for yard sales and other events.We backed a candidate last year for a local election and the very next day we drove around and picked them all up...........cleaned up the roads......and who knows....we might get to re-use them

That's what most candidates for local office tend to do. It seems most of the leftover signs we are still seeing are from statewide candidates who probably don't have a clue where the signs are.

[RailroadJoe]

My two cents.

We sportsman have a saying or two. One is "Carry out what you carry in" and two "Leave only footprints and take only photos".
Of course we have our "week-enders" that don't follow anything. I still find beer cans and coffee cups a mile or two in the woods, on and off trails.

All-in-all. If you can place the signs out why can't you take them in when its over. Same as the yard sale signs.

[Greene's Basin Girl]

[QUOTE=Ropetow;140393]That's what most candidates for local office tend to do. It seems most of the leftover signs we are still seeing are from statewide candidates who probably don't have a clue where the signs are.[/QUOTE The towns should charge the candidate if the signs are left up. After all the candidate wants everyone to put up his/hers signs all over the place. They are horrible to look at. People need to be responsible for their actions.

[Airedale1]

My experience with signs: they're expensive. The candidate with the most money wins - not necessarily the best candidate for the job.

It is not true that the candidate with the most money wins. If that were true we would have already had a President Forbes and a President Perot.

[gtxrider]

My home community removed the signs of defeated candidates placed on public property a few days to a week after the election. This is a bonanza for other local elected officials, as we can go to the home of the dead signs and pick their bones....the wire stakes signs sit on are not cheap and this is a way to save some $$$ for the next election while also practicing good recycling..

I don't know about the NH Primarys but it seems there are a few losers that won't accept defeat and continue to run so their signs can stay up but they would need to change the party.

I saw signs on docks and boat houses cruising the lake this past week. Who takes those signs down?

[jeffatsquam]

.

I don't know about the NH Primarys but it seems there are a few losers that won't accept defeat and continue to run so their signs can stay up but they would need to change the party.

I saw signs on docks and boat houses cruising the lake this past week. Who takes those signs down?

You can only hope the slobs that put them up

[Argie's Wife]

It is not true that the candidate with the most money wins. If that were true we would have already had a President Forbes and a President Perot.

It's been true, as a rule, in our local elections at least...